|
Represented privately-held investor in connection with its equity investments in and debt financing of frac sand companies located in Wisconsin.
|
|
Borrower, an aggressive serial filer, filed a quiet title and wrongful foreclosure action against the Investor following his 2008 foreclosure. The foreclosure itself followed on the heels of multiple suits by Borrower against his prior lenders and servicers for a variety of claims related to the origination of his loan and a PMI dispute. Borrower has been deemed an abusive filer by the Utah Federal Court in prior litigation and we filed a motion to dismiss all of his claims based on res judicata and failure to state a claim under Utah law. The Court granted that motion in its entirety on April 24, 2012 and the matter is now on appeal to the Tenth Circuit.
|
|
Represented a multi-state hospital system and its local health system affiliate in the sale of its large reference lab business to a national laboratory services company.
|
|
The firm represented Ally Financial, Inc, Residential Capital, LLC and GMAC Mortgage in the largest national joint state/federal government settlement in history. The case began with “robo-signing” investigation and then broadened into examination of the mortgage industry. The case involved 49 state attorney generals, 48 state banking departments, the Department of Justice, the Department of Treasury, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Consumer Financial Protect Bureau, and the Federal Trade Commission. The closely-watched and widely publicized case is precedent-setting in that it established national mortgage loan servicing standards. We represented our clients in successfully negotiating and advocating that, based on the clients’ past leadership in the loan modification/loss mitigation area, even during the worst economic conditions in decades, they should receive a reduced settlement amount. In addition, we negotiated a different consumer relief structure as part of the settlement that recognized the clients’ past accomplishments in loan modification/loss mitigation. Court entered the Consent Order on April 5, 2012 in the District Court for the District of Columbia. The total settlement amount was $25 Billion. Our client paid $309 Million.
|
|
Represented Nashville Public Radio in the issuance of $3,400,000 The Industrial Development Board of The Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County Revenue Refunding Bonds (Nashville Public Radio Project), Series 2012 and the refunding of $4,850,000 The Industrial Development Board of The Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County Adjustable Rate Revenue Refunding Bonds (Nashville Public Radio Project), Series 2005
|
|
Represented R&B Building Maintenance, LLC as special franchise counsel in acquisition of assets of regional master franchisee used in its business of selling unit franchises to provide commercial, industrial and institutional cleaning and maintenance services in Nashville, Knoxville and Chattanooga, Tennessee and Lexington, Kentucky territories.
|
|
Assisted aluminum smelting and recycling facility in obtaining grant for certain infrastructure improvements to project site and statutory tax abatements from the City of Bessemer.
|
|
Represented Space Park Properties Partnership is the sale of a 200,000+ square foot warehouse facility and 11.257 acres in Goodlettsville, Tennessee.
|
DRI members Harold Stephens and Michael P. Huff, both from our Huntsville office, recently obtained a defense verdict in a medical malpractice case. The case involved allegations that their physician client, an OB/GYN, improperly performed a bilateral tubal ligation on the plaintiff without her consent and also failed to suture the plaintiff’s uterus properly following a C-section delivery. The plaintiff was a 36-year-old female who delivered her fifth child (seventh pregnancy) via a C-section, after confirmation via ultrasound of a breech presentation. The plaintiff alleged that after the C-section, she endured months of extreme abdominal pain until a subsequent treating OB/GYN performed surgery and allegedly found her uterus “sewn” shut and her cervix left open to the abdominal cavity. Prior to the post-delivery surgery, an ultrasound revealed the presence of a left ovarian cyst. However, the subsequent treating OB/GYN made no mention of finding a cyst during his exploratory laparotomy. He did report significant inflammatory findings; however, a post-surgery pathology report indicated no infection was present. The subsequent treating doctor also acknowledged that the irregularities he found in the plaintiff’s anatomy were in precisely the same areas where he was dissecting with sharp scissors. At trial, the defense expert testified that the subsequent treating physician was likely the cause of the condition he purportedly found, based upon how he performed the second procedure. The expert further testified that the sutures used to close the C-section incision would have been absorbed at the time of the second surgery, making it impossible for the subsequent physician to have found the uterus “sewn” shut. The type of sutures used to close in the original C-section would have been dissolved weeks earlier. The plaintiff also alleged that she did not consent to a bilateral tubal ligation. The plaintiff and her OB/GYN both testified that an ultrasound that was performed at 34-weeks indicated a breech presentation. Both agreed that the physician defendant spoke at that time with the plaintiff about a C-section, as well as a tubal ligation. The physician testified that the plaintiff at that time expressed a desire for a bilateral tubal ligation. The plaintiff testified she did not. While the first consent form signed by the plaintiff did not reference the tubal ligation procedure, a second consent form was signed that included the tubal ligation, after an ultrasound was performed to confirm the breech presentation and the necessity of a C-section. The plaintiff denied ever signing the second consent form. A forensic handwriting expert presented by the defense testified that, based upon his analysis of various forms that the plaintiff admitted to signing and his review of the original signature on the tubal consent form, he was certain that the signature on the tubal consent form was that of the plaintiff. After a week of trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the physician and co-defendant hospital. To learn more about DRI, an international membership organization of attorneys defending the interests of business and individuals in civil litigation, visit www.dri.org. |
|
Represented Sy.Med Developments, Inc., a provider of physician credentialing software to over 800 customers, in the sale of 100% of its issued and outstanding securities to HealthStream, Inc., a Nashville-based publicly traded company in the healthcare research and education industry.
|
|
Represented Defran Systems, Inc., a New York-based developer of case, clinical and financial management software for the human and social services industries, in its sale to an affiliate of Netsmart Technologies, Inc.
|
|
Race discrimination and harassment cased filed in federal district court. Former employee Nicholson alleged racial harassment, a racially segregated work force, discipline in a discriminatory manner, and two failure to promote claims against the City. Obtained summary judgment in favor of the City of Clarksville dismissing all claims. Nicholson filed notice of appeal to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
|
|
Represented defense contractor in connection with an incident which occurred at Naval Air Station in California, and the subsequent sale of the company with pending issues regarding liability to the US Government for cleanup.
|
|
Represented Vulcan Materials Company (NYSE:VMC) and certain of its subsidiaries as Alabama, Mississippi and Tennessee local counsel in a $600 million syndicated ABL credit facility with SunTrust Bank as agent for the lender group.
|
|
Negotiation and advice to client after receipt of cease and desist demand by party using similar mark, and negotiation of settlement of dispute.
|